Related
Hello forums, I've got an annoying problem I've stumbled into. I wanted to download and install KBOX2 onto my OPO for the sake of being able to play gblorb files, I download the OneBox Package Manager that should do that automatically by executing a script in Terminal Emulator and instantly an error pops up as seen in the title of the thread, the whole PIE thing. Now, after extensive googling it seemed like a very early problem that eventually either got patched, or it was exclusive to early nexus models and fixed but some zip.
I have found no info on PIE in Lollipop 5.0 or 5.1, or for my OPO, outside of one website having an article on how to run python in the terminal - it had a subsection devoted to bypassing PIE, which included renaming your original linker to linker.old and then substituting in a patched linker in /system/bin/ that would avoid the whole PIE thing. The next problem I have stumbled into is that even after unlocking my boot, installing TWRP and rooting the device after a lot of hassle with drivers:
Whenever I would mount my /system for the sake of modifying the linker file, it would either keep trying indefinitely or fail promptly, after which I all of the sudden had no root access anymore, root checker showed I didn't have root anymore, and upon restarting my device it would be unable to boot into the OS, and instead boot into TWRP. After even more hassle I have some backups ready to easily mitigate all that but I simply cannot comprehend what the problem is. Seemingly I rooted the phone correctly yet when I want to execute a root action like changing something in /system/bin, it just unroots itself and bam. I have also tried doing all of the above through TWRP itself, mounting system, changing the files (successfully), and then unmounting it / leaving it mounted, it would still not be able to boot into the OS.
Bumping.
exactly the same.
i cant flash anything into /system/bin
i also want to patch linker file, to use SSHTunnel properly in Lollipop.
i use CyanogenOS (CM12S), and TWRP.
how to flash it?
Bumping once more. Does no one have this problem at all ?
I mean fine, PIE might not be common now, or the linker file I have might be the fix i need, but what about the system partition thing ?
The background: thought I had everything backed up but didn't realize there was something I missed. A quick wipe of all partitions on the phone has removed the data partition's file index. Then I realized I was missing data from my backup.
The problem: file recovery tools I've come across thus far don't seem to want to look for this particular type of file... simple XML. I'm also trying to limit use of the phone itself because installing of new apps to try and recover the data may overwrite sectors that are needed for the recovery. I'm already feeling sort of lucky that this is a 32GB internal memory device and my estimate of the file size is going to be <200MB. In that respect odds of data already having been overwritten in the minimal use I've had since should be slim, and if it has occurred it is probably something I can fake my way around.
Steps taken so far: from TWRP recovery's terminal I performed a dd of /dev/block/mmcblk0p38 (data partition on my Moto XT926M) to a file on an external card. This has enabled me to more easily work with the data from my Ubuntu desktop and also to not have to worry about further changes of the data from phone usage. I've already located via grep and parsed out via dd two XML files that I lost but those were easy as they were each under 100KB. I've located the start of the last XML file I want to recover but after about 1.5MB the trail goes cold. Either the data was contiguous and has already been overwritten at that point or the original file was being written, encountered a next block that was already occupied and continued writing elsewhere. I'm hoping for the latter.
SO...
With this image of the data partition and the knowledge of "this is where the file starts" does anyone have thoughts on how I can continue to work to find the missing pieces of this file? Assuming that from the staring point I've found that the original write just had to skip and continue writing at a different block, in f2fs is there a way to see that from the vicinity of the data I've located? I seem to think when looking at low-level data for some disk format method that the last handful of bytes (or maybe in some sort of header bytes?) of one file segment would indicate what block/sector/offset the next file segment would start but I don't know if that is the case here. Better yet any Linux based utilities that can take an f2fs partition dump and do advanced forensic recovery? I'm able to instruct it that the file starts at byte X of the image. I could try an Android app based solution but 1) that partition will continue to evolve and risk further destruction of desired data and 2) apps I've examined so far are great for finding pictures and videos, not so much at anything else.
My alternative is going to be to continue grepping through the image searching for known XML tags and manually trying to piece things together. At that point the 32GB MMC size changes from a blessing to a curse. Needle, meet haystack.
Oops, in hindsight I probably should have had this under "Android General" instead of this sub forum. Mods, I leave it to your discretion regarding movement but you can't argue that this is highly technical.
Any Luck
Pow_2k said:
Oops, in hindsight I probably should have had this under "Android General" instead of this sub forum. Mods, I leave it to your discretion regarding movement but you can't argue that this is highly technical.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi mate .. have you been able to recover files .. i am in a same situation ( forgot to back up my pictures and formatted internal sd to F2FS ..
please let me know
Thanks
I would recommend the link here.
At the end you will find all the interesting tools as link.
https://articles.forensicfocus.com/...bile-devices-running-android-operating-system
Best regards!
Sent from my HTC One_M8 using XDA-Developers mobile app
just some more useless link
https://www.magnetforensics.com/resources/recovering-evidence-from-f2fs-file-systems-with-ief
has anyone ever undeleted single file?
NOTE:
I'm not a developer or something even near to that. I'm a newbie and will be, seems so. All information provided here is copied and compiled from different internet sources. This information is according to best of my knowledge and comprehension and is just for curious souls like me who want to understand things in quite simple words.
I have tested this on different devices. I'll not be responsible for any harm to you or your device. It works perfectly for me. You may try it on your own risk.
Encrypted memory may cause problem in backing up and restoring data. So better decrypt it before proceeding. Or the Recovery should support decryption of /data partition.
WHY YOU NEED TO BACKUP YOUR DATA
For security, in case if device is lost. Read here more about the risks.
If you are going to change your device.
If your device is running out of memory space.
If your device is slowing down or giving random errors and you want a clean start i.e. by factory data reset.
If you are upgrading your Factory Firmware or ROM (OS).
If you are a curious soul like me and interested in experimenting with device.
WHAT TO BACKUP
Backup is a broad term used in many contexts.
PERSONAL DATA
On an android device, backing up personal data like pictures, music, videos, documents, e-books etc. means backing up Internal Memory (/data/media/) and SD card (if you use one). If you have disabled internal memory (D.I.M), your SD Card would be working as Internal Memory.
Personal data might be created by apps (like Camera, Facebook, WhatsApp etc) or imported from internet or other devices by yourself.
APPS & APPS DATA
If you are upgrading your ROM permanently, you might be interested in backing up your apps and their data as well. So that you don't lose important data and don't have to install apps again. System apps are stored in different folders under /system/ while user apps under /data/.
Apps typically store their data in /data/data/ but it's not a rule. Many apps save / backup their data on Internal Memory and/or SD Card as well. That's why you see folders named 'Android', 'data' etc. on Internal Memory and SD Card. Also, there are numerous folders named after app names. These folders may contain Personal Data as well, created by that certain app.
Contacts and messages are also stored in their default apps' data folder i.e. in /data/data/ and are not usually backed up manually.
OPERATING SYSTEM & APPS & APPS DATA
If you are going to install new ROM temporarily, you may want a complete backup so that you don't have to go through the hassle of installing apps and setting up / personalizing your device again. It usually includes /system, /boot and /data partitions.
OS consists of SYSTEM and BOOT. While user apps & apps data is stored in DATA.
PARTITION IMAGES
From a developer's perspective, one may want to backup the whole device partitions, in case if something goes wrong during experimenting.
Read here more about android partitions.
WHERE TO BACKUP
INTERNAL MEMORY (/sdcard) (/storage/sdcard0) (/data/media/0)
This memory can be used to save data if you are not going to wipe / clean it. A Factory Data Reset usually doesn't wipe this but it can. It depends on the device. Similarly, Recoveries usually don't wipe internal memory but you can manually do so. However, formatting /data would certainly erase internal memory. Formatting might be a part of flashable zip if you are going to install new ROM. Flashing Factory Firmware using flasher will also erase internal memory.
EXTERNAL SD CARD (/external_sd) (/storage/sdcard1)
This is a more safer place to save / backup data because it is not wiped unless done manually or accidentally.
PERSONAL COMPUTER (USB Flash drive or Internal / External Hard Disk)
This is the safest place to keep data with abundant space and the least chances of losing / corrupting data.
ONLINE / CLOUD STORAGE
Some apps, including Google offer backing up your data online and auto-synchronizes it. You should certainly avail this option particularly for sensitive and light weight data like contacts, messages, documents, saved passwords, bookmarks, financial transactions etc. WhatsApp also has a good online backup option. You can use apps like Drive, SMS Backup & Restore, FolderSync, KeepSafe etc. to better utilize this option. But technically, this is a limited option.
HOW TO BACKUP
FILE EXPLORER APPS
You can use a file explorer like ES Explorer or Solid Explorer to manually copy files from, say, Internal Memory to SD Card to back it up.
BACKUP APPS
Some default apps have built-in feature to backup data and settings locally and online e.g. GO-SMS, Tasker etc. You can check apps for this feature.
Also, special backup apps like Titanium Backup can backup almost all of your user and system apps and their data. It can also backup contacts, messages, device settings etc. It can create a flashable zip of backed up data to flash through recovery. However, backups from one ROM may not fully work with other ROM's.
CUSTOM RECOVERY
Backing up data when ROM is running isn't safe. When files are being used by OS, they might not be written / read sometimes. So, a custom recovery is the best option to backup/restore data. Custom recoveries (TWRP/CWM) can backup / restore partitions SYSTEM, BOOT and DATA (excluding internal memory) for sure. Some new recoveries offer backing up more (or all) partitions on device. You can choose where to save backup files i.e. Internal Memory or SD Card. Then you can transfer these files to PC as well.
You can also use recovery's File Explorer to copy Internal Memory to SD Card. However, it's a slower process if you have a large number of files to backup.
PC
You can use PC in multiple ways to backup/restore data within device or from/to PC.
First of all, you will often come across different software advertised on net claiming to fully backup your device when connected to PC. They work but are not much useful / reliable according to my experience. Give them a try, if you want to.
Secondly, you can use USB cable to directly connect your device (as MTP in ROM or recovery) to PC or use apps like Wi-Fi File Transfer to wirelessly connect (in ROM) and then explore Internal Memory and SD Card. FTP or SFTP (SSH) server may also be setup on Android to remotely access it from PC if both are on same network.
Thirdly, you can mount SD Card as flash drive (UMS in ROM) or switch off your device, remove SD Card and then insert directly into PC through card reader to manually copy files. This method is faster, to copy large data. However, mounting as UMS in running ROM isn't recommended, particularly if you are using D.I.M. It will crash apps.
In Android 5+ UMS may not be available in USB settings as it has been deprecated in favor of MTP to avoid problems. However, to copy large data from internal SD card is really problematic without direct USB connection. Or what if we need to recover accidentally deleted data from internal memory? We can directly attach internal memory (as in UMS) to PC by a little hacking.
Fourthly and ultimately, like a boss , you can use life saving ADB feature of android to backup/restore your data as well as recovering your device from difficult situations and doing a lot of stuff. It's the best and fastest method to backup Internal Memory to SD Card and then restore (COPY WHOLE FOLDER (within device)). Or you can COPY WHOLE FOLDER (From/To PC) or COPY WHOLE PARTITION IMAGE (within device) or BACKUP / RESTORE APPS & DATA (From/To PC) in seconds.
Read here more about android partitions.
Another application that you can use to backup your phone to computer is Apowersoft Phone Manager. This works greatly in managing your devices plus it make sure that all your files are secured from being corrupted or loss.
doublematteo said:
Another application that you can use to backup your phone to computer is Apowersoft Phone Manager. This works greatly in managing your devices plus it make sure that all your files are secured from being corrupted or loss.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can't determine the efficiency of the Apowersoft tool, but if you want to backup data , this is right way , after the phone data is backuped ,you don't have to worry about the deleted data unable be recovered back ,
The backup files is the best way to recover deleted data from phone
Kindly guide me on restoring app data alone from a nandroid to newer version of an app..
The scenario is that ,I upgraded to a higher android OS but find some of my apps(with no cloud storage),restored from my nandroid ,crashing; probably prompted by the change in OS.
I downloaded the compatible version of the app from playstore,but am clueless how to sync restored app data from nandroid to this version.
DIGVIJAY24 said:
Kindly guide me on restoring app data alone from a nandroid to newer version of an app..
The scenario is that ,I upgraded to a higher android OS but find some of my apps(with no cloud storage),restored from my nandroid ,crashing; probably prompted by the change in OS.
I downloaded the compatible version of the app from playstore,but am clueless how to sync restored app data from nandroid to this version.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Would you please mention apps names? Don't uninstall previous version. Just install compatible version over it. It should automatically have previous app data.
The backup program is much simpler than the android recovery program,
I came here looking for the best way to back up my internal storage before activities like flashing a new ROM or firmware. Previously, I'd plug my phone into my PC and just drag and drop the internal storage partition to a folder on my computer, but I'd often have to do it a few times because some file would get hung up, or the phone would randomly disconnect (even though my phone, cables, and computer are all new and high quality).
I'm currently using the TWRP file explorer to copy /sdcard to /external-sd/!InternalBackup, but there is no running log or progress indicator... So, this approach is less than ideal.
I'm still looking for the best method (not necessarily a software that will do it for me) that will do it fast, not get interrupted, and provide good feedback on if it's working and how much longer it will take. (The TWRP method above checks the first 2 criteria, but the 3rd is woefully insufficient.
I'm thinking that the best way to back up the internal SD will be in recovery, otherwise something might be in use and will halt the process.
Any suggestions?
DrPhant0m said:
I came here looking for the best way to back up my internal storage before activities like flashing a new ROM or firmware. Previously, I'd plug my phone into my PC and just drag and drop the internal storage partition to a folder on my computer, but I'd often have to do it a few times because some file would get hung up, or the phone would randomly disconnect (even though my phone, cables, and computer are all new and high quality).
I'm currently using the TWRP file explorer to copy /sdcard to /external-sd/!InternalBackup, but there is no running log or progress indicator... So, this approach is less than ideal.
I'm still looking for the best method (not necessarily a software that will do it for me) that will do it fast, not get interrupted, and provide good feedback on if it's working and how much longer it will take. (The TWRP method above checks the first 2 criteria, but the 3rd is woefully insufficient.
I'm thinking that the best way to back up the internal SD will be in recovery, otherwise something might be in use and will halt the process.
Any suggestions?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Commandline solutions are always best. You have better control over them. Use TWRP built-in terminal to run commands.
Simply 'cp' with verbose option "-v" is what fulfills your needs. 'rsync' is better if you want to save time by automatically skipping unchanged existing files. If you want to preserve file attributes and permissions, use 'tar'. Added compression can be achieved by 'xz' or '7za'. All of these commands are stable solutions, with high speed and ability to handle/resume broken/interrupted operations.
TWRP comes with busybox bundled. Busybox utilities have limited functionality and mostly suffice the need but rarely we face unexpected behavior. Instead you can use full static binaries of these commands.
Typing lengthy commands in TWRP shell terminal is somewhat challenging. Either use 'adb shell' or for repeated use, create a shell script and place it in internal memory or SD card. Or you can unpack TWRP image and save script in /sbin directly to run it just as a normal command. Another easy way is to create a flashable zip of your script. This way you can also see progress bar moving if you write a proper script for it.
Hope it helped.
mirfatif said:
Commandline solutions are always best. You have better control over them. Use TWRP built-in terminal to run commands.
Simply 'cp' with verbose option "-v" is what fulfills your needs. 'rsync' is better if you want to save time by automatically skipping unchanged existing files. If you want to preserve file attributes and permissions, use 'tar'. Added compression can be achieved by 'xz' or '7za'. All of these commands are stable solutions, with high speed and ability to handle/resume broken/interrupted operations.
TWRP comes with busybox bundled. Busybox utilities have limited functionality and mostly suffice the need but rarely we face unexpected behavior. Instead you can use full static binaries of these commands.
Typing lengthy commands in TWRP shell terminal is somewhat challenging. Either use 'adb shell' or for repeated use, create a shell script and place it in internal memory or SD card. Or you can unpack TWRP image and save script in /sbin directly to run it just as a normal command. Another easy way is to create a flashable zip of your script. This way you can also see progress bar moving if you write a proper script for it.
Hope it helped.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's a lot of help... But I lack the basic understanding and experience to make use of it all. I'll have to Google it a bit and look at some examples. Thanks!
UPDATE: I did a little research, and I succeeded in using "cp" to do a test move in TWRP (I had to use -r and -v), but even using -v didn't create a progress bar or any indication that files were being moved. It just finished and went to the next new line. Is this expected?
Also... my version of TWRP doesn't seem to have rsync available. When I try to use rsync in TWRP, I get
Code:
sh: rsync: not found
So it seems that TWRP's terminal doesn't have rsync. I'm using TWRP 3.0.2-1
So... I'm currently using the Termux app to do the cp operation. I'd prefer to use rsync, which is supported in Termux, however, unless I do "su" first, it says it doesn't have access to the destination folder. And, when I use "su" I can't use rsync. I get pretty much the same message as when I try to use it in TWRP... something like "rsync not found"
Does this mean that when Termux is using root, it can't use rsync? Does that make sense?
Any help?
Thanks!
DrPhant0m said:
I did a little research, and I succeeded in using "cp" to do a test move in TWRP (I had to use -r and -v), but even using -v didn't create a progress bar or any indication that files were being moved. It just finished and went to the next new line. Is this expected?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
'cp -r' copies recursively i.e. files/directories under directories and so on. So it's definitely required if you want to copy directories. 'cp -v' shows each file which is being copied, but not the progress during a single file copying. Check 'cp --help' for options.
Also... my version of TWRP doesn't seem to have rsync available. When I try to use rsync in TWRP, I get
Code:
sh: rsync: not found
So it seems that TWRP's terminal doesn't have rsync. I'm using TWRP 3.0.2-1
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
TWRP uses busybox which doesn't have rsync built-in. You can get a copy of static (independently working) rsync binary from many sources like this. Aarch64 will be a bit faster. Check 'getrpop | grep ro.product.cpu' to find your CPU architecture if it's 64-bit or 32. When in TWRP, place binary in /sbin directory. Then do 'chmod 0777 /sbin/rsync' to make it executable. Now you can use rsync. 'rsync --help' will show you options and basic help. Do note, /sbin is on volatile filesystem i.e. it will be gone on reboot. Don't expect it to be permanently there. You can also use rsync from other locations like sd card but that will need to call binary with full path and filesystem may put restrictions on execution.
So... I'm currently using the Termux app to do the cp operation. I'd prefer to use rsync, which is supported in Termux, however, unless I do "su" first, it says it doesn't have access to the destination folder. And, when I use "su" I can't use rsync. I get pretty much the same message as when I try to use it in TWRP... something like "rsync not found"
Does this mean that when Termux is using root, it can't use rsync? Does that make sense?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's expected. When we do 'su' on Termux, it's environment is gone and PATH is set to /system/bin etc. So any binaries which Termux downloaded to /data/data/com.termux/files/usr/bin won't work. There are better options, but easiest is to use 'tsu' instead of 'su' on Termux. It will handle things for you to run Termux binaries in superuser mode. Do 'apt install tsu' when connected to internet. Once installed, simply execute 'tsu'. Now you can use Termux rsync binary.
Or use rsync static bianry instead as explained above. Copy rsync to /system/bin/ or /system/xbin/ etc. and set permissions. SELinux may interfere if it's set to "Enforcing". Do 'getenforce' to check and 'setenforce 0' to set it "Permissive".
DrPhant0m said:
That's a lot of help... But I lack the basic understanding and experience to make use of it all. I'll have to Google it a bit and look at some examples. Thanks!
UPDATE: I did a little research, and I succeeded in using "cp" to do a test move in TWRP (I had to use -r and -v), but even using -v didn't create a progress bar or any indication that files were being moved. It just finished and went to the next new line. Is this expected?
Also... my version of TWRP doesn't seem to have rsync available. When I try to use rsync in TWRP, I get
So it seems that TWRP's terminal doesn't have rsync. I'm using TWRP 3.0.2-1
So... I'm currently using the Termux app to do the cp operation. I'd prefer to use rsync, which is supported in Termux, however, unless I do "su" first, it says it doesn't have access to the destination folder. And, when I use "su" I can't use rsync. I get pretty much the same message as when I try to use it in TWRP... something like "rsync not found"
Does this mean that when Termux is using root, it can't use rsync? Does that make sense?
Any help?
Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This reply is probably a bit late for you, but...
If you install tsu (pkg install tsu) in TermUX and use tsu rather than su, it'll work.
Tsu sets up the runtime context for su properly.
Sent from my OnePlus3T using XDA Labs
BillGoss said:
This reply is probably a bit late for you, but...
If you install tsu (pkg install tsu) in TermUX and use tsu rather than su, it'll work.
Tsu sets up the runtime context for su properly.
Sent from my OnePlus3T using XDA Labs
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey, it's never too late to refine your backup strategy. Thanks for letting me know.
I installed tsu in Termux, and when it finished, I tried to use rsync with su, and got the same "rsync: not found" error. Please see the following output, with my entries in Bold[/B].
Code:
$ [B]pkg install tsu[/B]
[COLOR="Gray"][I]~~
~~[LOTS OF LINES DETAILING THE INSTALLATION OF TSU]~~
~~[/I][/COLOR]
Setting up tsu (1.1)...
$ [B]su[/B]
elsa:/data/data/com.termux/files/home # [B]rsync[/B]
sh: rsync: not found
127|elsa:/data/data/com.termux/files/home #
*** Though I did enjoy watching the movie with my son, I did not pick the name Elsa for my device. That's just what LG called the carrier-free V20, Model US996.
Am I doing something wrong? To be clear.. I just did "rsync" without any commands/switches to see if it would produce the help info. I knew it wouldn't actually attempt to copy anything.
DrPhant0m said:
Hey, it's never too late to refine your backup strategy. Thanks for letting me know.
I installed tsu in Termux, and when it finished, I tried to use rsync with su, and got the same "rsync: not found" error. Please see the following output, with my entries in Bold[/B].
*** Though I did enjoy watching the movie with my son, I did not pick the name Elsa for my device. That's just what LG called the carrier-free V20, Model US996.
Am I doing something wrong? To be clear.. I just did "rsync" without any commands/switches to see if it would produce the help info. I knew it wouldn't actually attempt to copy anything.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol! You missed the key point: use tsu instead of su.
Instead of typing "su", type "tsu".
But don't take it too hard - I did the same thing when I first started.
Sent from my OnePlus3T using XDA Labs
Got it. Worked just fine. Thanks!
DrPhant0m said:
I installed tsu in Termux, and when it finished, I tried to use rsync with su, and got the same "rsync: not found" error. Please see the following output, with my entries in Bold[/B].
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I mentioned to use 'tsu' instead of 'su' but probably you missed that.
mirfatif said:
When we do 'su' on Termux, it's environment is gone and PATH is set to /system/bin etc. So any binaries which Termux downloaded to /data/data/com.termux/files/usr/bin won't work. There are better options, but easiest is to use 'tsu' instead of 'su' on Termux. It will handle things for you to run Termux binaries in superuser mode. Do 'apt install tsu' when connected to internet. Once installed, simply execute 'tsu'. Now you can use Termux rsync binary.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
/data/data/com.termux/files/bin/tsu is just a wrapper i.e. a shell script that sets environment variables for Termux and then executes 'su'.
mirfatif said:
I mentioned to use 'tsu' instead of 'su' but probably you missed that.
/data/data/com.termux/files/bin/tsu is just a wrapper i.e. a shell script that sets environment variables for Termux and then executes 'su'.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I see it now. I gave a thanks, though admittedly late. Sorry!
Is backup feasible when sd external card has been mounted extending the internal storage (Android 6.0), working as internal storage as well?
Can some expert comment on this, just not to go crazy for nothing. I don't want to upgrade with last rom by manufacturer and lose my data.
I have ADB , fastboot and usb drivers, but trying and use Helium backup I was unable to pair, even though the phone is connected (I can select onscreen for instance PTP or usb storage, tried both, nothing).
Not even sure about nandroid backup also.
HeyRicardo said:
Is backup feasible when sd external card has been mounted extending the internal storage (Android 6.0), working as internal storage as well?
Can some expert comment on this, just not to go crazy for nothing. I don't want to upgrade with last rom by manufacturer and lose my data.
I have ADB , fastboot and usb drivers, but trying and use Helium backup I was unable to pair, even though the phone is connected (I can select onscreen for instance PTP or usb storage, tried both, nothing).
Not even sure about nandroid backup also.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes it's feasible but depends on what, how and where you want to backup.
mirfatif said:
Yes it's feasible but depends on what, how and where you want to backup.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Any solution is fine to me, I just want to be able to restore apps and launcher (Nova launcher prime) with icons arranged as they are, without having to start all over from scratch.
Other data are on the cloud, so if I can possibly backup some folder (from phone or sd card, if the difference matter in my case) good, or I'll take care of it in advance.
Just having the phone upgraded but not reset from the beginning.
If necessary I can try rooting it. Thx for replying.
how to use a twrp data backup for oder rom?
My thread and project are inactive now. Please accept my apologies for this inconvenience.
ast.ls
Blackout
ast.np
Blackout
ast.pm
Blackout
ast.ops
Blackout
ast.settings
Blackout
ast.storage
Blackout
2nd Feedback
Thanks for the dedicated thread. If I may, some more nitpicking about rudimentary things.
ast.install has hard coded file names of ast scripts, that's not very portable:
l_Scripts=( "ast.ls" "ast.np" "ast.pm" "ast.ops" "ast.settings" "ast.storage" "astcore" )
I have packages ( "ast.ls" "ast.net" "ast.pm" "ast.ops" "ast.set" "ast.sto" "astcore" )
so more generic pattern for handling like ast* may be considered. In case of renaming, ast.install could have a file renaming template (ast.rename) with say key value rows for generic renaming procedure before starting the actual transfer/installation. Another thing it could try to perform chmod 755 after installation.
EDIT: Looks like you have it but it doesn't work as system is read-only for say /system/xbin installation directory. So installation can be performed either by hand from a file manager with root access or TWRP recovery (install script for easy TWRP install may be a solution).
Do you have any comparative performance observations regarding background network access?
2a. The interesting are the influence of size of the blacklist on system/apps behaviour (fluency, speed, memory usage or possibly noticed negative consequences re some specific apps). By default whitelist contains less than a dozen of items, blacklist is empty. What packages would you consider safe to remove from the whitelist, like LG weather widget? Will 300 blacklisted items be completely practical to have?
2b. Battery consumption changes and practical benefits measured re having hundreds of packages blacklisted vs normally empty blacklist.
2c. I remember you mentioned a FW app you installing on the end of device restoration process, what functionality separate FW app provides for your use case, or is that just an app like AdAway?
hotcell said:
Thanks for the dedicated thread. If I may, some more nitpicking about rudimentary things.
ast.install has hard coded file names of ast scripts, that's not very portable:
l_Scripts=( "ast.ls" "ast.np" "ast.pm" "ast.ops" "ast.settings" "ast.storage" "astcore" )
I have packages ( "ast.ls" "ast.net" "ast.pm" "ast.ops" "ast.set" "ast.sto" "astcore" )
so more generic pattern for handling like ast* may be considered. In case of renaming, ast.install could have a file renaming template (ast.rename) with say key value rows for generic renaming procedure before starting the actual transfer/installation. Another thing it could try to perform chmod 755 after installation.
EDIT: Looks like you have it but it doesn't work as system is read-only for say /system/xbin installation directory. So installation can be performed either by hand from a file manager with root access or TWRP recovery (install script for easy TWRP install may be a solution).
Do you have any comparative performance observations regarding background network access?
2a. The interesting are the influence of size of the blacklist on system/apps behaviour (fluency, speed, memory usage or possibly noticed negative consequences re some specific apps). By default whitelist contains less than a dozen of items, blacklist is empty. What packages would you consider safe to remove from the whitelist, like LG weather widget? Will 300 blacklisted items be completely practical to have?
2b. Battery consumption changes and practical benefits measured re having hundreds of packages blacklisted vs normally empty blacklist.
2c. I remember you mentioned a FW app you installing on the end of device restoration process, what functionality separate FW app provides for your use case, or is that just an app like AdAway?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I "liked" your post because your nitpicking is only indication of your care and liking AST scripts, I respect that.
Now, onto addressing your 2nd phase of nitpicking, mildly jocking. As I mentioned previously, perhaps in Info Bank thread, once I get a question, in order not to repeat myself I would cover it, thoroughly, in its relevant post/tool. Please read post #3 for everything I could share on Netpolicy.
Naming issues: Please rename/copy ast.install to ast.setup or anything you wish then update the array list to your liking. This is a quick solution for anyone with the same issue. The beauty of AST is you can modify its scripts in any way you wish in a text editor, on any platforms. Please kindky, don't ask me and provide me with the solution when is not practical. I'm referring to your copying idea instead of hardcoded list of scripts. I know what I'm doing in this instance.
ast.install automatically mounts /system to 'rw' if it was 'ro'. If it was 'rw' already it never set it back to 'ro' to avoid causing problems to the process which set it to 'rw' before ast.install was executed. There are times, /system cannot be mounted as 'rw'. I can guess why, but don't wish go into details for now. A reboot often solves the problem. ast.install will show an error message if it fails but you didn't mention that in your post. So I have no idea what you have complained about at the end.
You have mentioned TWRP before as well. In order to avoid confusion to other users, AST has nothing to offer in TWRP and I don't know why you think it does. I have installed AST to /system/xbin on two LG V20 phones with the same script with no issues. If it is easier to do this manually please do by all means. When you mention installing AST from TWRP, you would give the wrong impression to users, as if AST is an overly complicated thing.
I don't have the time nor the patience to measure battery consumption. Battery consumption is very subjective, as you know. However, I would appreciate it if you like to share your future findings with the community in here.
I'm sorry, I don't recall what was exchanged in reference to 2.c.
Since I know you like AST, how about sharing something with the community about how it made things easier for you? That is a feedback too. No one would take my word for it because they think I'm on my way to become a millionaire.
3rd Feedback
xdav20 said:
I "liked" your post because your nitpicking is only indication of your care and liking AST scripts, I respect that..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I never do posts asking or hoping for likes. That would be rather strange assumption. Regarding your obviously negative connotation here, it would be more appropriate if you simply remove the "like" you made.
Now, onto addressing your 2nd phase of nitpicking, mildly jocking. As I mentioned previously, perhaps in Info Bank thread, once I get a question, in order not to repeat myself I would cover it, thoroughly, in its relevant post/tool. Please read post #3 for everything I could share on Netpolicy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for more detailed explanation. I have to note that you added the explanations in your post #3 after I asked the relevant net policy questions. Either way, IMHO your statement "I think the performance loss or gain is debatable, totally dependant on how Android internally implemented it, and, frankly, this is something I don't wish to get heavily involved with. Please kindly, keep me out of future debates." is not very encouraging. To me it seems that you aren't interested in the discussion of benefits in performance or possible battery savings here, thus logically negating the major possible purpose of using your tool from users perspective. That's strange indeed, but I do respect your wish, so that's it.
Naming issues: Please rename/copy ast.install to ast.setup or anything you wish then update the array list to your liking. This is a quick solution for anyone with the same issue. The beauty of AST is you can modify its scripts in any way you wish in a text editor, on any platforms. Please kindky, don't ask me and provide me with the solution when is not practical. I'm referring to your copying idea instead of hardcoded list of scripts. I know what I'm doing in this instance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here you are contradicting yourself. As you previously mentioned, you made a deliberate effort to ensure any script can be renamed and still maintain its integrity thus boosting flexibility of usage even more. But here you are basically insisting such move would not be practical. In previous post I suggested you to maintain this flexibility by introducing renaming templates file, so updating the tool will be a simple seemless step/command, without manual intervention required, regardless of a chosen naming scheme. Well, again, it's your call. Perhaps you'd reconsider, just like you did with the inner AST folder in the distribution archive (Thanks BTW for that!).
ast.install automatically mounts /system to 'rw' if it was 'ro'. If it was 'rw' already it never set it back to 'ro' to avoid causing problems to the process which set it to 'rw' before ast.install was executed. There are times, /system cannot be mounted as 'rw'. I can guess why, but don't wish go into details for now. A reboot often solves the problem. ast.install will show an error message if it fails but you didn't mention that in your post. So I have no idea what you have complained about at the end.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Indeed I mentioned this due to failure to obtain the expected result on execution of ast.install. Note this script can't be run from ext SD card due to the obvious permission / media format issue. But, normally the /system is in RO state, so even if jackterm has required root permission, the ast.install still would fail when run from internal storage:
elsa:/storage/emulated/0/Download/ast #sh ast.install /system/xbin
cp: /system/xbin/ast.ls: Read-only file system
chmod: chmod '/system/xbin/ast.ls' to 100755: Read-only file system
cp: /system/xbin/ast.net: Read-only file system
chmod: chmod '/system/xbin/ast.net' to 100755: Read-only file system
cp: /system/xbin/ast.pm: Read-only file system
chmod: chmod '/system/xbin/ast.pm' to 100755: Read-only file system
cp: /system/xbin/ast.ops: Read-only file system
chmod: chmod '/system/xbin/ast.ops' to 100755: Read-only file system
cp: /system/xbin/ast.set: Read-only file system
chmod: chmod '/system/xbin/ast.set' to 100755: Read-only file system
cp: /system/xbin/ast.sto: Read-only file system
chmod: chmod '/system/xbin/ast.sto' to 100755: Read-only file system
cp: /system/xbin/astcore: Read-only file system
chmod: chmod '/system/xbin/astcore' to 100755: Read-only file system
I) ast.install: Installation completed.
elsa:/storage/emulated/0/Download/ast #
Why and how reboot supposed to resolve that?
EDIT: Looks like it works fine when performed right after reboot! It would be nice if install script would try to perform a mount, cp, chmod and report about the failure. Instead of showing the (fake) message "Installation completed." the hint to reboot and retry would be much more useful.
You have mentioned TWRP before as well. In order to avoid confusion to other users, AST has nothing to offer in TWRP and I don't know why you think it does. I have installed AST to /system/xbin on two LG V20 phones with the same script with no issues. If it is easier to do this manually please do by all means. When you mention installing AST from TWRP, you would give the wrong impression to users, as if AST is an overly complicated thing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It has nothing to do with wrong impressions. All I tried to suggest was an attempt to provide a path to easy and working solution to install/update AST and have a workaround for system RO state issue as described above. One still will have to ensure the system partition is mounted in TWRP before doing AST install/update. Sure if ast.install or its exec environment can be fixed, there would be no need to reboot to recovery or perform manual steps with a file manager.
I don't have the time nor the patience to measure battery consumption. Battery consumption is very subjective, as you know. However, I would appreciate it if you like to share your future findings with the community in here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If and when I'll proceed with net policy customisation and start to have some comarative data on battery consumption, I'll try to post here without involving you to the subject as per your wish to keep you out of future debates.
@hotcell
I have attached a modified version of ast.install that would double check if 'mount' command remounted /system rw or not. If the script still fails to copy your scripts, without displaying an error message, then, and previously, the problem has nothing to do with my script. I haven't developed 'mount' binary nor know why on your particular system things doesn't work normally. There is no 'fake' message, because of what happens the script assumes everything went well. If the scripts were previously copied to the target location, there is no easy way to know if the copy was successful or not. For such non-critical job, doing more is waste of time.
"ast.storage -lb online" displays the mounted partitions. The very last data is the current read/write status of the partition. After a reboot, could you run the above command to see what it prints about /system partition before and after running ast.install please.
I'm a tool maker, I'm not going to tell anyone where you can use my tool. I can provide guidance how the tool should be used, for productivity purposes only. What thing you have forgotten was, ast.np is a helper tool for Android Netpolicy tool. Without ast.np it is, literally, impossible to use it due to the input format it takes. Knowing how over analytical you can be, I made it clear I wish to stay away from any future debates myself. I have not stated, no one else can debate about it on my thread. I'm sorry, if you took my statement personally and I encourage you to use my thread to discuss anything related to AST. I would response, if I had to.
I thought for a while, how can I prove to @hotcell I wasn't being sarcastic when I "liked" his post? My proof is at the very end of that post when stated: "Since I know you like AST, how about sharing something with the community about how it made things easier for you?" If I didn't mean it, I wouldn't have stated a factual thing, I would had said; "If you like AST then why don't you...". Since I meant what I said without a menacing connotation, I stand by my previous decision. However, I do share your sentiment about the "like" system in place.
I have a serious issue with you or anyone else who think I have to accommodate to their specific needs in the same release that is meant for the public and no matter how accommodating I have been to you, you still have an approach that I don't feel comfortable with it. I will response equally to anyone who would want to dedicate terms to me. Once you renamed the scripts, I do not have to change the installer with your suggestion method, period. Have you thought, in the same directory users might have scripts or files starting with the "ast" prefix? That was the reason I hard-coded the script names to avoid potential disasters.
Edit: Noticed your edited comment about everything started working after a reboot. I do not like to discuss about something, specially in a public forum, when I do not have factual information. I'm normally good at observing patterns. I'm purely guessing, the reason behind the failure of mount command is to do with how certain file managers that support root handle mounting /system partition. Of course, there is always more than one reasons to such conditions.
Here is what you can do to see if that is the caase or not. Do everything as you would do after a reboot. Use the file managers you use and access the /system partition and copy something over to force the file manager to make the /system partition rw. Exit the file manager and then try the installer script again. Repeat the same thing, this time don't use the same file managers and after the system has been up and running for awhile, try the installer script again. What did you observe?
4th Feedback
Yes, you were right. After writing to the /system with MiXplorer file manager, the ast.install script fails. See screenshots: first made befre using MiX on /system, after that script worked; the second pic shows the ast.install.sh failure after using MiX, please note the (fake because of actual failure to mount and errors reported before) success report on the last line; the trird pic was made after the failed install. Also, with Root explorer, it asks to remount the system partition as R-W for operation, after that the ast.install(.sh) fails exactly as shown on the middle pic.
xdav20 said:
There is no 'fake' message, because of what happens the script assumes everything went well. If the scripts were previously copied to the target location, there is no easy way to know if the copy was successful or not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The easiest way to know is probably to try to write an empty file into installation dir and check for its existance. Another way would be checking file timestamp.
I have a serious issue with you or anyone else who think I have to accommodate to their specific needs in the same release that is meant for the public and no matter how accommodating I have been to you, you still have an approach that I don't feel comfortable with it. I will response equally to anyone who would want to dedicate terms to me. Once you renamed the scripts, I do not have to change the installer with your suggestion method, period. Have you thought, in the same directory users might have scripts or files starting with the "ast" prefix? That was the reason I hard-coded the script names to avoid potential disasters.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Of course you don't have to accomodate or appease anyone. If maintaining renaming flexibility and extending that to install script is not you goal AST tool may benefit in terms of flexibility, just forget about this. And yes, I thought about ast prefix oversimplicity. That is the exact reason why I suggested ast.rename file template where one can explicitly define source-destination name pairs. So having a single fixed named file name for such template is all needed to avoid any possible clash.
hotcell said:
Yes, you were right. After writing to the /system with MiXplorer file manager, the ast.install script fails. See screenshots: first made befre using MiX on /system, after that script worked; the second pic shows the ast.install.sh failure after using MiX, please note the (fake because of actual failure to mount and errors reported before) success report on the last line; the trird pic was made after the failed install. Also, with Root explorer, it asks to remount the system partition as R-W for operation, after that the ast.install(.sh) fails exactly as shown on the middle pic.
The easiest way to know is probably to try to write an empty file into installation dir and check for its existance. Another way would be checking file timestamp.
Of course you don't have to accomodate or appease anyone. If maintaining renaming flexibility and extending that to install script is not you goal AST tool may benefit in terms of flexibility, just forget about this. And yes, I thought about ast prefix oversimplicity. That is the exact reason why I suggested ast.rename file template where one can explicitly define source-destination name pairs. So having a single fixed named file name for such template is all needed to avoid any possible clash.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for the quick response. Of course, if my script fails, so as everything else from command line. Now that we established my guess is an actual fact, I have another immediate concern.
Thanks to your screenshots, I have noticed storage.ast -lb command is not displaying the partition fs type and partition read&write status of /system and /userdata and there were errors. I installed Mixplorer and navigated to xbin and created a file. Went back to terminal and used ast.storage -lb online again and it reported everything correctly. You either have a corrupt fs table or there is a condition that I haven't seen before. To make sure, I would like to ask you to send me the following files by running these commands please:
Code:
cat /proc/mounts > mounts
cat /proc/self/mountinfo > mountinfo
cat /proc/self/mountstats > mountstats
Please make sure you have used Mixplorer or the usual things you do that may cause the problem first.
Edit: After a reboot, please run the ast.storage -lb online again and please report back if there were errors. I'm guessing if you do, there is something wrong on your end.
Disclaimer: At the time of publication of this article, I have not found a way to remedy the problem with the application mentioned in this article. If you did, please notify me to make the appropriate changes to this article.
This article came to existence after exchanging messages with @hotcell to which my further investigation revealed a problem with MIXplorer app. I understand MIXplorer has a thread on XDA so there is a chance the developer to be contacted to rectify the problem.
The problem is after /system partition is remounted 'rw' (Read & Write) MIXplorer does not set the partition back to 'ro' (Read-only) even after the application is closed explicitly. This can leave you extremely vulnerable in case a malicious app awaits for such opportunity. Fortunately, after a reboot all partitions will be set back to their default status. However, users might not reboot their phones for days.
Root Explorer from SpeedSoftware has a mount toggle (rw,ro) button for each partition you use which it gives you the control to change the status at will. Then I tested ES File Explorer, as soon as I closed the app the /system was remounted back to 'ro'.
Thanks to ast.storage -lb command I could easily tell what was going on. My advice to you is, to either contact the developer of MIXplorer and request the partitions to be remounted as 'ro' upon exiting the app or similarly to provide a toggle button. In the mean while, I wouldn't use MIXplorer on a device that is connected to the internet.
5th
@xdav20
Although irrelevant in the thread common context, please see the attachment below (as it looks like you disabled PM functionality).
I see your AST gives formatting errors, but practically I can't see any problems with my system. Also, looks like if /system left R-W mounted by a file manager or other app, AST has no way to proceed. As you noticed about re-mounting on-the-fly from UI, reboot can be avoided by remounting the /system as RO in Root Explorer. Also, another decent file manager X-plorer doesn't need an (clean) exit as it will re-mount the system as RO after FS operation finished.
hotcell said:
@xdav20
I see your AST gives formatting errors, but practically I can't see any problems with my system. Also, looks like if /system left R-W mounted by a file manager or other app, AST has no way to proceed..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for the files. I will start looking into them.
I have already stated, two posts up, ast.storage's -lb command works fine on my phone even with MIXplorer installed and /system remounted rw. While I'm trying to establish if your phone has a problem or not, I have to be here correcting your incorrect statement. Also, I'm wondering why you never reported the error messages before when you did about other things?
Edit: I have attached a screenshot to prove everything works. I deliberately set the /system to rw.
6th
xdav20 said:
Thank you for the files. I will start looking into them.
I have already stated, two posts up, ast.storage's -lb command works fine on my phone even with MIXplorer installed and /system remounted rw. While I'm trying to establish if your phone has a problem or not, I have to be here correcting your incorrect statement. Also, I'm wondering why you never reported the error messages before when you did about other things?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Perhaps my statement is incorrect, I've no idea. But how would you explain that after Root Explorer toggling to RO state ast.install works perfectly, what Root Explorer can do that ast.install can't?
For the last question there is an easy answer: When I reported about "fake installation success" clause, it was obvious the copy failed, screenshots were attached. Timing to report wasn't/isn't critical for me. Also, looks like you are using SuperSU while I've Magisk, maybe there are some diffs/settings related?
EDIT: After playing with renaming ast.net in /system/xbin via X-plore, Root Explorer and MiX more:
1. X-plore always know how to rename the file
2. Root Explorer knows and warns when in RO state, but fails to rename after subsequent renamings in other FMs. Toggling RW->RO>RW restores renaming capability.
3. MiX fails to rename first.
hotcell said:
Perhaps my statement is incorrect, I've no idea. But how would you explain that after Root Explorer toggling to RO state ast.install works perfectly, what Root Explorer can do that ast.install can't?
For the last question there is an easy answer: When I reported about "fake installation success" clause, it was obvious the copy failed, screenshots were attached. Timing to report wasn't/isn't critical for me. Also, looks like you are using SuperSU while I've Magisk, maybe there are some diffs/settings related?
EDIT: After playing with renaming ast.net in /system/xbin via X-plore, Root Explorer and MiX more:
1. X-plore always know how to rename the file
2. Root Explorer knows and warns when in RO state, but fails to rename after subsequent renamings in other FMs. Toggling RW->RO>RW restores renaming capability.
3. MiX fails to rename first.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Found the cause, I think I have the solution, and I have to leave to my dentist appointment soon. I will release a fix as soon as I can. There is nothing wrong with your device but with what you use that commonly cause problems to everyone else's (not literally) code. Thanks again for the files. The future fix will not fix the mount issue, mount issue is a common issue in Android because so many processes use /system partition and bound to be conflicts.
7th
xdav20 said:
Found the cause, I think I have the solution, and I have to leave to my dentist appointment soon. I will release a fix as soon as I can. There is nothing wrong with your device but with what you use that commonly cause problems to everyone else's (not literally) code. Thanks again for the files. The future fix will not fix the mount issue, mount issue is a common issue in Android because so many processes uses /system partition and bound to be conflicts.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, although I have no idea what you are going to fix (as it seems the issue is in mounting)
Anyway, I thought you can try to implement an algo like this:
1. check if /system looks mounted as RW, remember the state for later restoration, if not RW, try to re-mount
2. create am empty file named as current time in installation dir
3. try to check if it exists. if yes, delete it and set flag ready=true and proceed to #5.
4. if flag tried is not set (false), try to make double re-mount RW>RO>RW, set flag tried=true, return to #2.
5. if flag ready=false, return error message asking to either reboot or mount /system as RW and exit
6. if ast.rename is absent from install dir, perform scripts copy, otherwise the same with renaming according to the template
7. set chmod on script files as required. Done.
@hotcell
I have attached a pre-release version of AST to this post. This release contains support to handle multiple mountpints on online blocks. Android by default has one single mountpoint per block. However, components/su such as Magisk creates additional mountpoints, one on /dev/block/sda14 and two on /dev/block/sda18. AST can now handle multiple mountpoints on any online blocks, referring to -lb command. Thank you again for the files and your assistance in resolving this issue.
As you have guessed by now, Magisk was the cause of errors and I'm guessing the source of your /system mount issues. Now, that '-lb' command can show correct information on your device, you can keep your eyes on read and write status of both mountpoints on /dev/block/sda14. Please kindly provide a screenshot of '-lb online' so I can make sure everything was okay before releasing it on OP. Since you have installed AST in /system/xbin, please do not run anything locally without specifying its full parh in command line. I'm updating OP about this point shortly.
One minor matter, I have to respectfully ask you to refrain from referencing to AST scripts as your renamed versions. I got confused when you referenced ast.np to ast.net. For anyone following our conversations it can workout confusing too. At this point of time, I don't wish to make a rule and publish it on OP. I hope you can understand the point I raised. Thank you for your understanding.
Edit:01
Added two screenshots. Magisk-Partitions image shows the online partitions with Magisk being installed (based on your device data files) and Default-Partitions image shows a typical device without Magisk? Have you spotted the additional entries?
Noone has marked this solved so I am posting here to make it easier to find the solution that works.
Credit goes to hachamacha.....if this works for you, please click the link below and click 'thanks' on his original post. I can't figure out how to quote his post without it just adding to the many pages of the OP he commented on, plus I have changed the instructions to do it all within TWRP instead of using adb. It worked and was much simpler, BUT, he gets the credit for the solution.
https://forum.xda-developers.com/oneplus-5/help/error-255-twrp-t3739468/page2
For me the problem was hidden 999 files. I cleared everything mentioned in all the other posts, but still could not back up. The 999 files were tucked away in 2 spots no one had mentioned in any post.
Reminder, turn off your screenlock password before you start.
I booted into TWRP, clicked advanced, terminal, cd /data/, typed "ls */999", made a note of all the locations that had 999 files.
Then I ran "ls */10" to make sure there was not a guest profile( there wasn't for me, but you may have one).
Went back to file manager, navigated to each location, deleted the 999 folders.
Rebooted into TWRP, repeated the previous steps to verify no more 999 files, advanced, back up. Worked like a charm.
Reboot system.
Be sure to copy the file to your computer if you are going to install a custom ROM as it will get wiped in the process.
Here is the content of hachamacha's post post:
"I just ran into this too. I'm looking here after the fact and the way I fixed it and don't see what I did so this is it:
- for me, it was the presence of multi-user directories in numerous places. I don't use multi-users on pie so not sure why they're there, but it hurts nothing to delete them.
- if I only deleted 999, that'd not have worked for me
- First: I read the recovery.log file after rebooting after the failed backup. It's a big file, so I transferred it to a laptop and used notepad+ --
- Look in there for the error (tarfork) and then look for the file/directory that began the chain of errors. Mine happened to be /data/vendor_ce/10
- Go to your /data/ folder in root explorer (or equiv):
- Do an ls */10 to find out all the places the 10 user occurs or you'll then get the error on the next 10 file. For me it was 5 other dirs.
- All you should have for user number directories in those places is 0 (unless you use multiple users and then I don't know).
- delete each one. I did it all from adb on a booted op5. so like this: "rm -r /data/{folder}/xx" where {folder} is where you found the 10 11 whatever, and xx is user-numbers other than 0
- when you've got them all gone, reboot directly into recovery so you have no chance of the system recreating them (so for me: adb reboot recovery)
- Backup. Mine worked no errors and was actually faster too because the errors take time to timeout.
- reboot system
Careful when using 'rm -r' that you only delete what you want to or you can mess up your phone. - cheers.
Edit: Twrp Version: Probably should mention SW versions: Twrp, latest 991 blu_spark twrp, OS: 9.0.3 Pie, Other: xXx noLimits Rom/"
PattayaGlock said:
Noone has marked this solved so I am posting here to make it easier to find the solution that works.
Credit goes to hachamacha.....if this works for you, please click the link below and click 'thanks' on his original post. I can't figure out how to quote his post without it just adding to the many pages of the OP he commented on, plus I have changed the instructions to do it all within TWRP instead of using adb. It worked and was much simpler, BUT, he gets the credit for the solution.
https://forum.xda-developers.com/oneplus-5/help/error-255-twrp-t3739468/page2
For me the problem was hidden 999 files. I cleared everything mentioned in all the other posts, but still could not back up. The 999 files were tucked away in 2 spots no one had mentioned in any post.
Reminder, turn off your screenlock password before you start.
I booted into TWRP, clicked advanced, terminal, cd /data/, typed "ls */999", made a note of all the locations that had 999 files.
Then I ran "ls */10" to make sure there was not a guest profile( there wasn't for me, but you may have one).
Went back to file manager, navigated to each location, deleted the 999 folders.
Rebooted into TWRP, repeated the previous steps to verify no more 999 files, advanced, back up. Worked like a charm.
Reboot system.
Be sure to copy the file to your computer if you are going to install a custom ROM as it will get wiped in the process.
Here is the content of hachamacha's post post:
"I just ran into this too. I'm looking here after the fact and the way I fixed it and don't see what I did so this is it:
- for me, it was the presence of multi-user directories in numerous places. I don't use multi-users on pie so not sure why they're there, but it hurts nothing to delete them.
- if I only deleted 999, that'd not have worked for me
- First: I read the recovery.log file after rebooting after the failed backup. It's a big file, so I transferred it to a laptop and used notepad+ --
- Look in there for the error (tarfork) and then look for the file/directory that began the chain of errors. Mine happened to be /data/vendor_ce/10
- Go to your /data/ folder in root explorer (or equiv):
- Do an ls */10 to find out all the places the 10 user occurs or you'll then get the error on the next 10 file. For me it was 5 other dirs.
- All you should have for user number directories in those places is 0 (unless you use multiple users and then I don't know).
- delete each one. I did it all from adb on a booted op5. so like this: "rm -r /data/{folder}/xx" where {folder} is where you found the 10 11 whatever, and xx is user-numbers other than 0
- when you've got them all gone, reboot directly into recovery so you have no chance of the system recreating them (so for me: adb reboot recovery)
- Backup. Mine worked no errors and was actually faster too because the errors take time to timeout.
- reboot system
Careful when using 'rm -r' that you only delete what you want to or you can mess up your phone. - cheers.
Edit: Twrp Version: Probably should mention SW versions: Twrp, latest 991 blu_spark twrp, OS: 9.0.3 Pie, Other: xXx noLimits Rom/"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I followed your instructions and this is the text I got from the log file at the first instance of TarFork :
I:InfoManager saving '/external_sd/TWRP/BACKUPS/R58NC01GKMZ/2021-06-14--12-28-49_RP1A200720012A515FXXU4DUB1/system.info'
I:createTarFork() process ended with RC=0"
The second instance of Tarfork had this text:
I:Error adding file '/data/log/kTkdhdczEiKXeoU2sGBddC/_o43CsDAAAAQG3UaA4eJvz5TSJ2ntkPOu' to '/external_sd/TWRP/BACKUPS/R58NC01GKMZ/2021-06-14--12-28-49_RP1A200720012A515FXXU4DUB1/data.f2fs.win000'
Error creating backup.
I:ERROR tarList for thread ID 0
Error creating backup.
I:InfoManager saving '/external_sd/TWRP/BACKUPS/R58NC01GKMZ/2021-06-14--12-28-49_RP1A200720012A515FXXU4DUB1/data.info'
createTarFork() process ended with ERROR: 255
Backup Failed. Cleaning Backup Folder.
I tried all kinds of searches unsuccessfully in Terminal Emulator but since my log text is very different than your example I am at a loss. Do you have any advice of where I should go from here?